Template talk:Image paramount
Is there some Wiki formatting reason I'm missing for the fact that this seems manually indented on every picture? Not trying to be a smartass, just curious. --Broik 02:59, 28 Oct 2005 (UTC) :Somebody decided they liked it like that and did it to hundreds of pictures. Seems like a waste of effort. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 03:40, 28 Oct 2005 (UTC) ::I now indented the template content. Manual indentation should be removed, preferably by a bot. -- Cid Highwind 14:52, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC) Might I suggest that the text of this template should be changed to, "... belongs to CBS Paramount Television and/or Paramount Pictures," since Viacom's recent breakup means that the Star Trek TV series now all belong to CBS Paramount Television (a subsidiary of CBS Inc), while the copyright of the films stayed with Paramount Pictures (a subsidiary of Viacom)? -- Sci 03:45 10 July 2006 UTC :::The article on Paramount Pictures suggests that Paramount Pictures owns the rights to all of Star Trek and that CBS Paramount Television has the licenses to all television productions. This is a fine point, but perhaps there is a copyright attorney among our ranks who can clarify this. --GNDN 15:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC) ::::Ive heard about 10 different arguments saying one or the other owns it out right. honestly..i don't care. the point is to cover our asses in case one isn't enough. --''6/6'' ''Neural Transceiver'' 02:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC) :::::Agreed; until we find out exactly who owns what, stating the images are owned by either PP or CBS is a good way to handle it. The problem with all this is that, although CBS now owns the rights to the television productions, Paramount still owns the home video distribution department that released the Trek DVDs from which the majority of the images are taken from. The franchise itself, however, falls unders the ownership of CBS Studios. So, yeah... it's very complicated, so saying the image is owned by either/or is just fine for now. --From Andoria with Love 03:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC) ::::::Not an argument for or against one company... but the company that distributes has only the right to distribute... now thats not to say that PP doesn't have rights because of the split..thats confusing and the cause of this. Example. My brothers band is signed to a small local label. They are distributed through Century Media (a bigger, but still small national label itself). Now, Century media has bands of their own that they own the rights to and distribute, but they hold no copyrights to my brothers band. Thats not a claim against PP having content rights, just that distribution is not a claim to owning rights. --''6/6'' ''Neural Transceiver'' 07:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC) ::::::As I understand it, the legalities are as follows: ::::::CBS owns Star Trek as a franchise. Meaning, the Trek brand. It owns TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT, and all Trek trademarks (Star Trek itself being a trademark). Paramount Pictures, a division of Viacom, owns the Trek feature films, which are reguarded as being licensed materials based upon Star Trek. This is similar to the situation with Firefly -- 20th Century Fox owns Firefly, but Universal Pictures owns Serenity, the film based on Firefly, through license to 20th Century Fox. (It's important to note that Fox retains ownership of Firefly and the characters therein, even as the film itself is owned by Universal.) ::::::Paramount's home video/DVD dept. also has the rights to home video/DVD distribution of all of the various Trek productions. This does not mean that it owns the TV series that it is distributing -- it means that it has legal permission from the owners of the TV series to distribute the series. In the past, that basically meant that one division of Paramount granted another the legal right to distribute them; now it means that CBS grants Paramount that permission. "Owns the rights" doesn't mean "owns the series;" it means that they bought legal permission. Owning the rights to something doesn't mean you own that something. -- Sci 21:20 2 DEC 2006 UTC :::::::Owns the rights means owning the copyright. If you own the copyright, you OWN the works. This is the basis of the SCO vs. Linux suits. (The fact that no copyrighted code was used in Linux is why those suits went away, not the basis of the legal claims.) Now lets explain what we are trying to define. We need to cover our butts from the people who own the right to the frame we took the screen shot from, not the owner of the name Star Trek. CBS, from my investigation, owns the rights to the frames in all OTA broadcast episodes. I cannot find out if they own the frames from the films or not, but its pretty safe to assume they don't since the works (the frames) where produced by a different company, who is just using trademarks by license...not film content. I think its realy a moot point unless we get a letter from one of said companies demanding satisfaction, but listing both should satisfy them. --''6/6'' ''Neural Transceiver'' 18:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC) ::::::::On a side note... has anyone approached CBS/Paramount or any other potential rights holder about obtaining explicit permission to host these images, instead of listing them under fair use? --''6/6'' ''Neural Transceiver'' 18:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC) :::::::::It would be foolish to expect them to. There is no responsibility in a wiki. It would be a tremendous hassle to enforce any agreement, and they aren't just going to give away, for free and without restrictions, any rights, of any kind, to use intellectual propery that they paid >$10 billion for. --Bp 21:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC) ::::::::::If our fair use claim holds any water, then why wouldn't they? Its not like they are in the hole $10 billion, they have made almost all the money on the works in question they will for a while. What would we have to loose? If they don't give us outright permission (Which is on the lesser side of likely, but not impossible), we still have fair use. If they do, we can sleep easier at night, and slap a big honking "Approved by the creators of Star Trek" sign on the portal. but I digress. Onto the main matter. Has any progress been made in determining who the rights to the content belongs to, or are we just going to keep it as is till the next merger? --''6/6'' ''Neural Transceiver'' 18:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Ownership If I understand the split-up of the former Viacom into CBS Corporation and the current Viacom correctly; then CBS ownes the entire Star Trek franchise through its CBS Paramount Network Television division, and licenses the film rights to the new Viacom via through the latter's Paramount Pictures division. So should this template only point to CBS Paramount Network Television as the copyright holder? —MJBurrage(T• ) 23:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC) :Actually, I think it's best to just link to CBS Studios, since "Star Trek and related marks are trademarks of CBS Studios", according to merchandising, etc. --From Andoria with Love 09:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)